The claim is unusual in that members of the claimant''s family, rather than a general contracting firm, have been overseeing the repairs (although nearly complete, the repairs are ongoing) As a result, the documentation available to the Commission Panel for purposes of assessing the claim differed markedly both in quantity and qualitysubstance from that which is usually filed by claimants and is generally prepared by building contractors; consequently Therefore, the claim could not readily be valued using the standard D7 (real property) loss methodology, which relies heavily on the type of documents generated by contractors Further, while the property at issue is owned by the claimant, it includes an extensive complex of buildings that serve both private and governmental functions FinallyAlthough, the work at issue was undertaken in response toview of the extensive destruction of the claimant''s property during theIraq's invasion and occupation of Kuwait, but in the case of the claimant''s principal residence, this work was not limited to restoration of the property to its pre-warinvasion condition and included significant elements of non-compensable improvements As a result, the claimant has spent substantially more than the amount for which he claims, and the Panel was required to distinguish athe wider range and magnitude of compensable repairs from non-compensable improvements than is usual In considerationview of the unusual features of the D7 (real property) loss in this claim, the Panel concludetermined that it was necessary to employretain an expert quantity surveyor as expert consultant to assist itthe Panel in assessing the compensable loss.
Además, aunque la propiedad de que se trata es propiedad del reclamante, incluye un extenso complejo de edificios destinados a uso tanto particular como oficial. Aunque los trabajos de reparación se llevaron a cabo a raíz de los extensos daños sufridos por la propiedad del reclamante durante la invasión y ocupación de Kuwait por el Iraq, en el caso de la residencia principal del reclamante, los trabajos no se limitaron a restaurar la propiedad para restablecer la situación anterior a la invasión, sino que incluyeron importantes mejoras no indemnizables. Como consecuencia, el reclamante ha gastado una cantidad mucho mayor de la que reclama y el Grupo se ve obligado a distinguir las múltiples e importantes reparaciones indemnizables de las mejoras no indemnizables.